George F. Will: President Obama's agenda will spark a conservative revival

Comments

I love how liberals always assume conservatives were pro-Bush. What simple
brains they have

PopsNORTH SALT LAKE, UT

Jan. 29, 2013 7:31 p.m.

Socialism has many problems. If you want to talk control theory, it lacks proper
feedbacks to function efficiently as compared to free enterprise. There's
the problem of concentrated power - there will always be someone trying to
hijack the system for their own benefit. There's the problem that it works
very poorly in a heterogeneous society where not everyone shares the same values
and priorities.

Freedom / free enterprise / capitalism has its
problems as well, but it at least forces people to compete for what they get
rather than use force to accomplish their goals. You can tell how much
we've abandoned that ideal by how much influence Washington has in picking
winners and losers, and by how much people spend in order to influence
government.

When Keynesianism is viewed as a creator of wealth,
it's the economic equivalent of a perpetual motion machine. The two biggest
factors affecting wealth creation and standard of living are the cost of energy
and how efficiently we use energy. If we don't have inexpensive energy (and
we're well on our way not having it), Keynesianism is powerless.

NatePleasant Grove, UT

Jan. 29, 2013 2:06 a.m.

@SG: "...you need a carefully-crafted hybrid of capitalism and
socialism...."

The most recent housing collapse occurred
precisely because of that blend. Skilled technocrats created this disaster.
Always the cry is, let me tweak just one more thing -- I can get it working.

Hayek was right. It's a knowledge problem. The experts don't
know what they don't know, and are too proud to realize that hundreds of
millions of people making their own decisions are wiser than a few at the
top.

@LDS Liberal "Italy"

Are you kidding me?
Italy is broke. The other countries on your list are beginning to turn away from
socialism, as America embraces it. It's been a bad deal for them. We should
learn from their mistakes.

one voteSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 7:53 p.m.

Was not that Mitt Romeny's agenda?

SG in SLCSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 5:48 p.m.

No Nate, I would say that socialism tends to produce sub-optimal outcomes; but
then, so does laissez faire capitalism (externalities, adverse selection,
business cycles, etc.). For optimal outcomes (maximizing both efficiency AND
fairness; the greatest good for the greatest number), you need a
carefully-crafted hybrid of capitalism and socialism -- and that is where
Keynesianism falls.

Keynesianism is certainly not perfect, but it can
also certainly produce better outcomes than it has been allowed to thus far . .
.

Open Minded MormonEverett, 00

Jan. 28, 2013 5:38 p.m.

NatePleasant Grove, UT@Eric and SG "Keynesian economics"

Yeah, yeah. The reason it always fails, is because no one is doing it
right.

...never mind those good old boy patriotic American
Capitalists supporting and investing so heavily in Communist Red China.

NatePleasant Grove, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 4:57 p.m.

@Eric and SG "Keynesian economics"

Yeah, yeah. The reason it
always fails, is because no one is doing it right.

Just like
socialism.

SG in SLCSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 3:21 p.m.

@4word thinker

I'm not talking about the whole "bringing the
troops home" thing . . . I was responding to the following quote from your
previous post:

"Welcome to today. Obama is president. He has 6
Trillion in new debt, and is adding 4 billion more every day."

If
you want to concede that President Obama gets a bum rap regarding responsibility
for the magnitude of the national debt, I'll gladly accept -- then we can
discuss troop withdrawal issues (on one hand, I agree that Obama has been
dragging his feet on that; on the other hand, I think that his approach has been
much more orderly than he gets credit for from the folks who wrongly predicted
four years ago that he would "cut and run").

*****@Eric
Samuelsen

I wholeheartedly agree. The problem is not that Keynesian
economics doesn't work in practice, but rather, that true Keynesianism has
never actually been properly and fully implemented.

Eric SamuelsenProvo, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 2:27 p.m.

Sorry, Nate, but if you look at the world wide financial crisis, it's
patently obvious that Keynesian economics has been, in every instance, right.
The problems with the economy come from a failure to follow Keynesian
principles, including by the President, not any failure of those principles.

4word thinkerMurray, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 1:01 p.m.

Bush cannot bring home the troops today. Calling on him to do is utterly
silly.

Obama is the POTUS. He won, again, as you love to point out.
He is still president. He could bring them home tomorrow. Why doesn't
he?

He has had 4 years to bring the troops home.

No
whining about Bush. That was so 4 years ago.

All these statements are
regarding troops only.

President Obama criticized Bush for having
our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and campaign promised in 2008 that he would
bring them home. He is commander in chief, has been for 4 years, and they are
still there.

Why isn't his party at his throat to bring them
home? Because they are still rabidly doggedly clutching Bush in their mouths.
But for all the biting of Bush, he can't bring them home. Your man can, but
doesn't.

Can't you see you are barking up the wrong
tree?

If I concede that Bush wasn't perfect, would you then
think about the now and the future, and what your president is doing today to
shape tomorrow?

No, your jaws are stuck in the bushes.

SG in SLCSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 12:31 p.m.

4word thinker,

To attempt to take either Pres. G.W.Bush or Pres.
Obama out of the fiscal equation is disingenuous, at best. A number of
President Bush's fiscal actions have "kept on giving" for many
years after his presidency. In addition, when President Obama initially took
office in 2009, he inherited an economy that was in an uncontrolled power-dive
and was in the process of cratering. I don't believe that President Bush
was solely responsible for the Great Recession, though he certainly did have a
hand in it; there is plenty of blame to go around. A significant portion of the
deficit spending actually initiated by President Obama (and approved by
Congress) was an attempt to stimulate the economy (a process started by
President Bush at the end of his presidency, I might add).

If you
want to debate the merits of expansionary fiscal policy and deficit spending for
economic stimulus, fine; but let's be honest, objective, and non-partisan
about the origins of our current, admittedly unsustainable, national debt
situation, shall we? Anything less is just petty and lacks credibility.

ECRBurke, VA

Jan. 28, 2013 10:15 a.m.

I certianly hope Mr. Will is right. It has been disheartening to watch
conservatives contribute absolutely nothing to solutions needed to fix
what's wrong with the nation. As a perfect example look at the issue of
new laws contolling access to guns. 20 children and 6 of their teachers and
adminstrators are cut done in Connecticut and all conservatives can do is stand
firmly on their stiff interpretation of the Second Amendment. "There's
nothing we can do" is the mantra of the month.

It would also be
nice if Mr. Will got his statistics right. The most current polls show the
president with a 52% approval rating and the NRA with a 44% approval rating. As
opinion polls go that is a chasm between those two opinions.

"If
today the country had the same proportion of persons of working age employed as
it did in 2000, the U.S. would have almost 14 million more people contributing
to the economy." Ah yes, if only things could have remained positive as
they were in 2000. Then came the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars and trillions
in borrow and spend policies. Let's hope conservatives can get their act
together.

HemlockSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 9:49 a.m.

It simply means that eventually voters will figure out that someone has to pay
the bills. Living on "free money" is like the college freshman who
spends on their new credit card and then receives that bill. "But this was
such fun, you mean someone actually has to pay?"

4word thinkerMurray, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 9:41 a.m.

Bush cannot bring home the troops today. Calling on him to do is utterly
silly.

Obama is the POTUS. He won, again, as you love to point out.
He is still president. He could bring them home tomorrow. Why doesn't
he?

He has had 4 years to bring the troops home.

No
whining about Bush. That was so 4 years ago.

Welcome to today. Obama
is president. He has 6 Trillion in new debt, and is adding 4 billion more every
day.

Many small raises in the debt ceiling does not mean more debt
than a few big raises of the debt ceiling. The number of times the ceiling is
raised does not stand alone as an indication of debt.

But then again,
perhaps congress should only raise the debt ceiling one months worth at a time.
It might make the deficits smaller. We couldn't sweep the debt monster
under the rug and let it grow unchecked for months at a time. We would have to
deal with it monthly.

Let's try it!!!

Tyler DMeridian, ID

Jan. 28, 2013 9:33 a.m.

So here’s my question – what will this revival look like? Will it be
a revival of conservatives with ideas (that people actually support, and not
just bloviating wingnuts) and a desire to govern? We saw something like this in
the 90’s, and problematic as it was in some respects (shutting down the
government, witch hunt impeachment) they did actually work across the aisle on
occasion and got some things done. And they, along with a Democrat president,
left us a budget surplus.

Or will it be a rebranded repeat of 2010,
with their ideas drawn from such bizarre and contradictory sources as Atlas
Shrugged and the 5000 Year Leap, combined in a cocktail of anti-intellectualism
and overt religiosity, and a desire to shrink government to a size where it can
be “drowned in a bathtub?”

PaganSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 28, 2013 1:15 a.m.

Upset at $6 trillion?

Then why didn't Bush end his wars?

Not only did the Iraq war cost us over 4,000 brave US troops.

It cost us, every American taxper money ya know.

NatePleasant Grove, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 10:39 p.m.

@Mark B "preemptive history"

It's called a prediction,
but it's based on Obama's rigid attachment to policies and principles
that failed in the 70's and will fail again. What makes it worse this time
is the size of the debt, to which Obama has added $6 trillion since he took
office.

I'll put my prediction up against "the stimulus will
hold unemployment to 8%" any day.

"Worse than Carter."
Write it down.

HutteriteAmerican Fork, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 9:46 p.m.

I'd love to see a conservative revival. You know, the one with good ideas,
leadership and limited government. Instead, we get attempts at a republican
revival, with big spending, and Tea Party/Religious nutjobs.

PaganSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 8:57 p.m.

Ronald Regan raised the debt ceiling....x18 times.

W. Bush, x7
times.

Obama? x3 times.

Democrats factually ARE doing
better on the national debt than any Republican in modern history.

Dont' want debt?

Why vote Republican?

Cool Cat CosmoPayson, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 7:42 p.m.

Very well stated. He sums it up perfectly, reiterating the immense debt we are
passing off to our children, children's children, etc., and also shows just
how clueless our president and those who want to keep raising the debt ceiling
are.

"Our possibilities are limitless...wait, what is that? A
credit card bill? For...I don't even know how many zeroes that is...yeah,
uh, just shred that, and ask Congress to raise our debt ceiling a bit more.
I'll let the next president worry about it."

The immoral
use of money we certainly do not have to fund entitlement programs so that
increasingly more of us can sit on our duffs and collect a paycheck is reviling,
yet we tolerate it. No, Mr. President, America's possibilities are NOT
limitless; though those in Washington (and elsewhere too, sadly) seem to think
that our credit limit is. We will have to pay the piper sooner or later, folks.
And the sooner we do, the less interest we accrue (which is about $1 billion per
day). Sick to your stomachs yet? I certainly am.

the truthHolladay, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 5:54 p.m.

What I find absurd is are the ignorant attacks of left against the tea party.

It was the republican party, and Romney, that didn't stand for
anything that lost the election.

Not the conservatives, and certainly
not the tea party.

Both who have tried to find a voice in the
republican party, but the republican party will not stand for anything, they
will not fight for anything they will stupidly even kick their own right leaning
voices down.

Conservatives have tried to work with the republican
party.

The failures of the Republican party is of their own left
leaning, principleless moderate, RINO, doing.

So why vote a liberal
republican when you can vote for a real liberal?

They have never
given the electorate a real choice, when they have they have won convincingly
like with Reagan or in 1994.

even the so-called conservatives voices
now in congress are not willing to take a real stand, but have shown
willingness to compromise with uncompromising left.

It is not
conservatism that is losing, is is liberal republicanism that is losing and that
unfortunately is the voice that the GOP Party gives most support.

Mark lSALT LAKE CITY, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 5:02 p.m.

Another rational, well thought out analysis that will mostly be ignored from the
Obamabots.

atl134Salt Lake City, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 3:16 p.m.

Yeah it did, we called it the tea party, do they still have influence on things
other than sabotaging Republican senate pickups by nominating lunatics? Oh
right, they make things stressful for Boehner.

Mark BEureka, CA

Jan. 27, 2013 2:59 p.m.

I think I have a name for what Nate is attempting. Let's call it
"preemptive history". Put it alongside famous quotes like
"We'll be greeted as liberators."

the old switcharoomesa, AZ

Jan. 27, 2013 2:35 p.m.

Well, if Obama's approval rating is so low after the election that just
means republicans and Romney had an EVEN LOWER approval rating doesn't it?

UtahBlueDevilDurham, NC

Jan. 27, 2013 2:01 p.m.

I have not problem of a conservative revival.... I would love it if we say a
return of Reagan era republicans even. But a revival of the
do-nothing-but-say-no-Tea-Party types..... no one needs that. I welcome
anyone who can help America remain a competitive country in this now global
economy. All good ideas - left or right - are welcome. It is going to take a
hybrid of both tracks of thought to keep America dynamic and vibrant.

But this turning to the past, thinking we are an "exceptional"
people.... that isn't going to work. What we had was exceptional
opportunity that people with spin took advantage of - each step of it creating
new ground and rules. Turning backward.... we will be the new England, only
an empire in our minds.

North Carolina is in the process of
reinventing itself from an agricultural based economy to not the nations leading
banking center. The US needs to likewise to the same - top to bottom.
Conservative - Liberal - what ever it takes.

procuradorfiscalTooele, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 1:26 p.m.

Re: "Nice exercise in reality denial."

You mean, of course,
on the part of liberals. Particularly that liberal amen chorus that regularly
prowls these pages, poised to pounce on anyone speaking truth to cynical liberal
power.

Desperate denial of reality is the mother's milk of
liberal politics.

samhillSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 1:25 p.m.

As of this writing, I'm the 4th person to comment on Mr. Will's post
and the 1st (if I read the meaning of the other comments correctly) who
considers it in a positive light. Actually, a *very* positive light.

If only the other three commentators and more of the country had even a
fraction of the common sense that Mr. Will routinely demonstrates with his
always very well articulated articles, our country might stand a chance of
pulling out of what I fear is a tail-spin into some very rough times. Rough
times of the sort that much of Europe (Greece in particular) is now just
beginning to experience.

And, it should be noted that the reason for
their rough times and those that we are, seemingly, doomed to share, is the same
lame-brained socialistic policies that Obama is now, in his 2nd term, pressing
for with even more fervor.

I just hope that Mr. Will is correct and
I'm wrong, and that the conservative resurgence he's predicting
actually comes to pass. I think that's our only hope of avoiding or even
mitigating the worst effects of Obama's corrosive agenda.

PaganSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 12:41 p.m.

Regan Tripled the national debtW. bush doubled the national debtIraq
warAfghanistan war 9/11Patriot ActKatrinaTSABank bailoutsx7 raised to the debt ceiling The Current Republican
House has a majority that is Republican. And today, they have passed the least
amount of legislation than any in history.

3%.

And they
currently enjoy a 10% approval rating while Obama is over 50%, on his 2nd
term.

Besides offering speculation, what factually has Conservatism
done for you?

And why would I vote Republican?

NatePleasant Grove, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 12:15 p.m.

So far, Obama has gotten away with blaming other people, but this can go on for
only so long. At some point, the pain he is inflicting on our economy will cause
people to recoil. The policies announced in his second inaugural will only make
things worse.

So, yeah. History will judge Obama as "worse than
Carter," and the pendulum will swing back.

pragmatistferlifesalt lake city, utah

Jan. 27, 2013 11:32 a.m.

You just keep talking George that's what you're good at. Don't
bother to look at the actual polls, or just reality. There is a true
conservative argument to be made for all of our pressing problems, one that
could possibly attract voters but it isn't denial. Like I say, you just
keep talking George it's what you're good at.

The Real MaverickOrem, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 11:32 a.m.

Conservative "revival?"

I thought you folks already had that
a few years back with the Tea Party?

How'd that work out for
ya?

Is the GOP going to have new "conservative revival" every
few years? Great idea! NOT!

A great way to become politically
irrelevant is to continue to retrench yourselves in these "conservative
revivals." You folks lost because you were too conservative and
untrustworthy anyway.

PaganSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 11:11 a.m.

Agenda to date:

Healthcare for AmericansEnd of the Iraq warExit date for AfghanistanUnemployment down from 10% to 7.6%.(Lower than
when he took office.National debt has not doubled, and has slowed.Taxes the lowest since the 1950'sGhdaffi dead. (Libya)Kim
John Ill dead. (North Korea)GM is aliveOsama Bin Laden is dead.

The claim that Obama is doing 'bad' is just that, a claim.
Otherwise he would not have won his 2nd term with more votes than his 1st
term.

In my opinion, Conservatism is not offering solutions.

As such that 'revival'? Will be a long time in coming.

one old manOgden, UT

Jan. 27, 2013 11:09 a.m.

But at 50% Obama's "popularity" is far higher than that of
Congress. And far, far higher than that of the GOP.